[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251121205724.2934650-2-ameryhung@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 12:57:24 -0800
From: Amery Hung <ameryhung@...il.com>
To: bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
andrii@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net,
memxor@...il.com,
david.laight.linux@...il.com,
dave@...olabs.net,
paulmck@...nel.org,
josh@...htriplett.org,
ameryhung@...il.com,
kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] rqspinlock: Handle return of raw_res_spin_lock{_irqsave} in locktorture
Return errors from raw_res_spin_lock{_irqsave}() to writelock(). This is
simply to silence the unused result warning. lock_torture_writer()
currently does not handle errors returned from writelock(). This aligns
with the existing torture test for ww_mutex.
Signed-off-by: Amery Hung <ameryhung@...il.com>
---
kernel/locking/locktorture.c | 9 ++++++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
index ce0362f0a871..2b3686b96907 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
@@ -369,8 +369,7 @@ static rqspinlock_t rqspinlock;
static int torture_raw_res_spin_write_lock(int tid __maybe_unused)
{
- raw_res_spin_lock(&rqspinlock);
- return 0;
+ return raw_res_spin_lock(&rqspinlock);
}
static void torture_raw_res_spin_write_unlock(int tid __maybe_unused)
@@ -392,8 +391,12 @@ static struct lock_torture_ops raw_res_spin_lock_ops = {
static int torture_raw_res_spin_write_lock_irq(int tid __maybe_unused)
{
unsigned long flags;
+ int err;
+
+ err = raw_res_spin_lock_irqsave(&rqspinlock, flags);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
- raw_res_spin_lock_irqsave(&rqspinlock, flags);
cxt.cur_ops->flags = flags;
return 0;
}
--
2.47.3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists